As part of our 2026 Five Bar Gate panel survey, we asked a simple question: is there an organisation out there that needs to get closer to understanding what farmers want?
We tucked it in almost as an afterthought — one line near the end of the survey. What came back was anything but an afterthought.
63% of respondents pointed straight at government and Defra. Industry bodies like the NFU, AHDB and Red Tractor came next. Then machinery suppliers, supermarkets, and environmental groups.
We want to be upfront about why we’re publishing this. This isn’t a stick to beat anyone with. But it is a stick that needs a white flag attached to it, because there is a conflict here that needs to be brought to an end.
Almost none of the organisations named below are villains, most of those listed have undertaken research with us in the last 30 years. Crucially, most exist, in one way or another, to serve farming. What our panel told us is that the relationship has drifted, and it’s costing something. So here, in farmers’ own words, is what that gap actually looks like.
“Decisions are being made about farmers, not with them”
That line, from one respondent, is the clearest single summary of everything else in this data:
“Government, retailers and regulators all claim to support farmers — but too often design policy and supply chains that push cost, risk and complexity downwards. DEFRA and the Scottish Government still produce schemes that look good on paper but don’t work in real farm businesses. Supermarkets talk sustainability while resisting fair pricing or long-term commitment. Assurance bodies keep adding layers without removing any. The core problem is simple: decisions are being made about farmers, not with them. What’s needed isn’t more consultation — it’s shared risk, realistic timelines, and policies built around how farms actually operate, not how officials think they should.”
That’s not a farmer who’s given up. That’s a farmer who’s still trying to explain the problem clearly, one more time.
Government and Defra: distance, not malice
Most of what came back about government wasn’t anger for its own sake, it was frustration at how far removed the people making decisions seem to be from the people living with them.
“The government really seem so far away from what commercial agriculture looks like or needs to be competitive on the world stage or even to offer food security to the UK public.”
“UK Government is the main one, a constant revolving door of ministers with no affiliation to the countryside who are led by focus groups, consultations and populist policy.”
“The Government. 11 Defra Ministers in 10 years means they don’t even have time to get their Le Chameau wellies muddy!”
“The government seems to give lip service to the pressures of farming in a world where prices don’t reflect weather, energy prices, and support is through schemes which need an advisor to fill in the forms and advise on compliance. Life is getting too complicated with too many hurdles to be inadvertently tripped over. Please let’s make things simpler.”
A few went further, describing a government that’s actively set the wrong tone:
“Current Government – got off to a dreadful start with farmers. Started a class war against landowners on behalf of ‘hard-working people.’ (Galling that farmers aren’t considered ‘hard working’).”
When your own representatives don’t feel like yours
What surprised us was how many respondents didn’t stop at government. Some of the sharpest words were for the organisations that exist specifically to speak for farmers.
“We need to educate politicians and decision makers, and it needs to be real working farmers — not the NFU that politicians think represents the views of farmers. Locally we have three NFU members that meet regularly with MPs, all between 50 and 60 … MPs need to be talking to the people that are looking after our countryside and filling the shelves of the supermarkets.”
“The NFU! No really, they do. Them and the RPA don’t realise what arable farming is like for smaller farmers.”
Nature and environmental bodies: willing, but wary
This one came with more nuance than anger. Several respondents said they’re not opposed to environmental goals at all, they just don’t feel like a genuine partner in delivering them.
“Nature organisations and wildlife trusts. They are always ‘saving’ land from farming. I understand their business model is to divert funds into their own coffers … but it seems if they just worked with farmers – or let farmers have the funds – wildlife and nature would be considerably better off! They seem scared to even talk to farmers.”
“NatureScot (and similar environment-based organisations). I am in full support of providing biodiversity on the farm, but what are organisations such as NatureScot doing to support farmers to achieve this? For example, people are losing considerable amounts of lambs to sea eagles and receiving no compensation? Pretty sure if that same bird picked up a dog or cat from someone in the town there would be a very different response!”
“We need to work out how we can work closer with the environmental lobby, or at least the sensible parts of it, for mutual benefit.”
That last line is important. It’s not “keep them out”, it’s “let’s actually work together.”
Supermarkets and the wider public
A quieter but consistent theme: the gap isn’t only with officialdom. It’s with the people buying the food.
“Supermarkets, suppliers and the general public. Majority of folk think farmers are doing well and making a fortune. That is so far from the truth.”
“The buyers. They come up with glossy slogans and marketing but they are so far removed from what farming is.”
Where does this leave us?
We asked this question as a way of finding out who most needs farmer insight, where farmers don’t feel heard, and doesn’t currently have an easy way to get it. That’s still true, and it’s exactly what we intend to do with it.
But reading through response after response, it’s clear this isn’t only a research prioritisation exercise.
It’s a temperature check on a relationship between farmers and the organisations that shape their working lives – and the temperature is running hot. Not because anyone’s beyond reasoning with, but because too many farmers feel like decisions are being made at them rather than with them.
That’s the white flag this post is meant to carry. Not a call to arms, and not a scorecard of who’s “winning.” Just a clear, evidenced account — in farmers’ own words — of where the understanding has broken down, so that the organisations willing to listen have something honest to listen to.
If you’re one of the organisations named above — or one that recognises itself in this gap — we’d like to talk. Five Bar Gate, own home grown research community gives us direct, ongoing access to over 2,500 UK farmers. If closing this gap matters to you, get in touch at hello@groundedresearch.co.uk.
This post draws on open-text responses from 520 completed surveys as part of Grounded Research’s 2026 Five Bar Gate panel satisfaction survey conducted in Summer 2026. Quotes are reproduced anonymously, as submitted.